Suchergebnisse

Names such as Armor, Pettigrew, Glazer, Jencks, Herrnstein, Clark and Moynihan have not yet appeared in the pages of Ring magazine, but it seems only a matter of time. It is no secret, after all, that these men, all intellectual heavyweights, are engaged in an ongoing, fierce slugging match over a host of issues related to the "limits of social policy." Their verbal fisticuffs have been characterized by a good deal of fancy footwork, plenty of hard hitting, some low blows and inevitable cries of foul. For some time Public Interest was booking the best cards, but with more than 150 pages of its February, 1973, issue devoted to a detailed critique of Jencks's Inequality, it may be assumed that the Harvard Educational Review became, as it was during the Jensen brawl, the main arena of conflict. The bulk of recent attention was focused on the hard punching of Jencks's critics, but it would be a pity if the brilliant footwork of Kenneth Clark went unnoticed. His performance is simply remarkable.

Review of critics of the logical positivist description of scientific method & academic accounts of policy making suggests that analogies & metaphors are central features of the social-scientific enterprise. Critics of metaphorical thinking in social science argue that these "devices" are used uncritically & obscure reality because they are too intuitive & too interpretative to be considered scientific. But this approach is probably dangerous because it assumes that metaphors, analogies, & models have only scientific consequences. As devices of thinking, they also have effects on public life as well. Assessment of analogies & metaphors must depend on their implications for reforming the world. At issue is the question of whether policy sciences use analogies & metaphors in a responsible fashion & whether policy scientists are willing to take responsibility for the world they imagine. 65 References. HA.

The Social Science Information Service (SSIS), sponsored by the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, provides current social science information on provisions of emerging legislation to members of Congress. Its mode of operation is described. It is not a lobby, even though the bills of potential interest are brought to the director's attention by the Congressional liaison. A brief history of the SSIS is presented; comments & research findings brought to Congressional committees have involved problems of aging, nutrition, national health insurance, work satisfaction, juvenile delinquency, family & child services, coercive therapy, & runaway youth. The most recent activity has been the location of information on noneconomic effects of unemployment. The latest annual report includes material on the rights of children, aging, newsletter appeals, juvenile delinquency & runaway youth. Proposed activities include presentations on crime, energy, welfare reform, health care, & aging. SSIS hopes to develop relations with Congressional staff members to provide consultants to bring social science information to bear on the drafting of legislation & the proposal of new legislation. SSIS also plans to make further contacts with social science professional organizations to promote cooperation in locating relevant research. Modified Author Summary.